Log in/Register

Please log in or register to continue. Registration is free and requires only your email address.

Log in

Register

Emailrequired

PasswordrequiredRemember me?

Please enter your email address and click on the reset-password button. You'll receive an email shortly with a link to create a new password. If you have trouble finding this email, please check your spam folder.

To continue reading, please subscribe to On Point.

To access On Point or our archived content, log in or register now now and read two On Point articles for free and 2 archived contents. For unlimited access to the unrivaled analysis of On Point and archived contents, subscribe now.

Mr Blair,
as far as education is concerned one may say that the United Nations paved the way back in 1948 with the absolutely remarkable Universal Declaration of Human Rights. If it were celebrated every year on Human Rights Day (December 10th) in every school (and home?) around the world the world could feel and look quite different in a generation or two. Just one hour per year of tailored discussions and activities in classrooms up to 12th grade or equivalent so as to have the importance of all aspects of Human Rights reinforced throughout one's upbringing. In the past I (lone anonymous citizen) have tried to persuade various organizations within the UN, NGOs, news agencies to help starting such movement with zero results (or feedback for that matter). Perhaps you could use your influence to make it happen?
Regarding short and mid term solutions, more than anything else perhaps the Middle East should be able to find a solution for their long standing problems via their own leaders, with help from the West if/as requested. The next Gamal Abdel Nasser or Ṣalaḥ ad-Din is most probably fighting such dramas as I type these very words. Perhaps the only thing missing is the will to truly empower him/her.
Best regards.

The growing list of deadly terror attacks around the world is alarming but we must keep things in perspective and not overreact.

From 1900 to 2016, wars that began in Europe were responsible for the deaths of up to 250 million people (if you include deaths by famine caused by war and I admit the numbers aren't perfect, nor does every source agree) while the gross total number of deaths caused by Islamic terrorists in the same timeframe is far, far, below 1 million people.

*Maybe less than 100,000 (again, depending on whether you view the 'Mujahadeen' who were fighting the Soviets in 1980's Afghanistan as 'Muslim terrorists' or 'freedom fighters') and in other roughly similar situations elsewhere.*

So if some are trying to say that on the basis of body counts we people of European ancestry are somehow 'better' or 'superior' to those of different ethnicity who also happen to be followers of Islam, we're not.

Some media outlets here in North America (and probably some media outlets in Europe too) are getting uncomfortably close to helping to strengthen that false narrative.

In the fight against criminals, we must never allow racism to become part of the conversation. And, depending on where we get our news, it already has -- which is unhelpful in the extreme.
_____
To win against ISIS we must see what has worked elsewhere.

For many years the PKK (a Kurdish terrorist entity cum political party with an 'enforcement' arm) committed terror attacks on a similar scale to ISIS and hardly a word was said. Now they have their own territories within Iraq and no longer feel the need to engage in terror attacks.

And why would they? They now have much to lose -- whereas prior to gaining their own territorial homeland they had nothing to lose.

With that in mind, why would we try to bomb ISIS out of existence, when we took a completely different tack with the PKK and the Kurds which worked out just fine for all sides?
_____

Why are we bombing inside Syria and Iraq trying to destroy an organization that has hundreds or even thousands of cells throughout Asia and Africa?

These are highly mobile and highly motivated people with support on at least two continents.

Even if we bombed every single one of them out of existence in Syria and Iraq, thousands, perhaps hundreds of thousands, would remain scattered all over the globe.

And they're not going to sit around waiting for bombers to show up.

To completely destroy every member of ISIS we would need more and better intelligence, and more permission from every world government than we could ever hope to arrange, in order to bomb every ISIS location on the planet.

If even one country says "No" that's where the ISIS members will congregate.

And at the end of the day, how do you destroy an idea? How do you destroy an ideology?

Not with bomber jets!
_____
Since 2010, half of Syria's population is displaced, countries like Turkey, Germany, Jordan and Egypt, have taken upwards of 1 million refugees from Syria alone and other countries have taken in hundreds of thousands.

Germany and other countries that were perhaps a bit too welcoming and generous to refugees, are now in turmoil.

Thousands of bombing raids in Syrian territory have been carried out.

Billions of dollars have been spent.

And we are no closer to winning the war against ISIS, or even winning a peace.

In fact, Western kids who feel they have no real future are now travelling to developing nations to join ISIS!

That is colossal failure by any standard whatsoever!

Bomber jets haven't won the conflict, they've made it worse!

As Einstein wisely said: "The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over, and expecting a different result."

And there is a factor at play every time we drop bombs -- whether those bombs kill ISIS members or innocent civilians:

Each person on this Earth knows, or is related to, an average of 250 people.

Every time we kill an ISIS member, or an innocent civilian non-ISIS person, we've just created another 250 enemies for ourselves.

If we kill 10,000 people in airstrikes (whether ISIS members or innocent civilians) we've just created an additional 2,500,000 enemies for life.

We can't ever 'win' at that rate.
_____

"You never change things by fighting the existing reality. To change something, build a new model that makes the existing model obsolete." -- Buckminster Fulller
_____
We can't ever win the war against ISIS (which is, at the very least, a pan-Middle Eastern and pan-African organization) via the use of bomber jets in Syria and Iraq.

We can't win the peace by killing ISIS members (or innocent casualties who may be near a bomb blast and are killed/maimed/injured by the blast) with 250 angry friends and relatives per each person killed.

100 x 250 = 25,000
1000 x 250 = 250,000
10,000 x 250 = 2,500,000

Exactly how many lifelong enemies do we want to create?
_____
We can only win a lasting peace via the use of careful diplomacy with a majority of UN member states agreeing and supporting the peace agreement that must sooner or later, be negotiated with ISIS.

As with the PKK/Kurds, giving them their own homeland solved the PKK/terrorist problem -- almost immediately and almost completely.

No matter what else occurs, that is the only way to win against ISIS. Everything else is just speculation.

Once the ISIS members have something to lose, they will begin acting like people who have something to lose. Which is, Basic. Human. Psychology.

I agree with your point that education as an antidote to extremism will solve the fundamental problem. And I look forward to the day when an evenly disseminated, knowledge based world is the universal standard. However, that will take 20 years.

If we keep sending bomber jets we'll have 2.1 billion enemies by then.

Therefore, education as a long-term antidote to extremist thought and the creation of an ISIS homeland and the end of regional hostilities by the end of 2016 is what we need.

Thank you again for posting your fine essays here at Project Syndicate, Tony.

I agree in part with the comments of Mr Blair, however, the recent attacks on women both violent and sexual by large numbers of Arab or African in appearance over the New Year in Europe and Germany in particular, shows how far Islam is away from the developed world. I agree that Islam needs to be modernised, but not at the expense of European women.

I think that the only advice that the West should give and take is that it should leave to the countries of Islam the decision as to how they wish to live their lives.
If there are direct attacks by these countries on the West then there is a case for retaliation. However, our disagreement with how Islamic countries order their polity is completely their choice. LEAVE THEM ALONE.

I can't believe the unmitigated gall of this guy. I refuse to read his article as he should just hope that with time most of us will forget who started it all. Instead of which he keeps crowing from the dungheap of his convictions.

I am amazed that Mr Blair can pontificate about Islamist extremists when he and Bush Jnr launched the totally unwarranted war in Iraq which triggered the ongoing resort to arms and killing in so many parts of the Arab world,all of them powered by rival believers within the Islamic world itself. I notice 2 of the Blair foundations have Faith (with a capital F) in their title. Mr Blair has not yet learned that being prepared to die for our beliefs at the hands of rival believers is the very last thing the world needs. We all need to stick to the ground which is common to all of us, a

These little men who profess to be the saviors of the world often cause more problems than solutions. The problems of the Middle East emanate back to the imperialist days of European empires. Back then, Britain, France, and Italy, all wanted to carve out their African and Middle East empires. They had little regard for the history, culture, and the religion of the people they wished to rule. Subsequently, they divided up Arab lands willy-nilly and created problems which exists today.

When will Europe and the United States understand that all countries are entitled to manage their own affairs and do not need the advice and control of colonial nations to run their countries. It appears they have not learned this lesson and as a result, the Middle East is in a mess.

Another important lesson to be learned, is that terrorism is a direct outcome of external interference in the affairs of a sovereign nation. When a big nation attacks, invades, and occupies a small nation, the only recourse for the small nation is terrorism. And the more you attack small countries, the bigger the terrorist response there will become. This is not rocket science. If the world is worried about global terrorism, take a good look in the back mirror.

There is no doubt the major nations of the world can bomb ISIS into oblivion in Iraq and Syria, but that will not end the terrorist crisis. ISIS has now spread to several other countries. Does this mean that when ISIS is defeated in Syria and Iraq, that every other country in which ISIS exists must also be attacked? As well, there are more than 190 registered terrorist organizations throughout the world. What do the empire nations wish to do about them?

The sad reality is that the leaders of the failed empire nations still think they can rule the world. They are wrong. It is time to reinvent the Marshall Plan and help nations to develop and prosper, rather than try to put the yoke of oppression around the necks of smaller nations.

Did Mr.Blair know that the unfair war in Iraq in 2003 , launched by him & George Bush had provoked the radical Islamists in the region ? You are trying to defeat the Islamist radicals groups in the ME and you didn't tell us what kind of Islam you are looking for !! What kind of the Islamic model you are trying to establish ! . Whether you ignore or trying to ignore , the UK itself has a lot of radical Islamist fundamentalist movements working behind the fences and supporting ISIS by money & fighters , what did you do to them ? At the same time , you keep saying that Assad must leave and yourself cooperated with him after the Iraqi war ! I would like to remind you as ell that tens of thousands Syrian innocent people killed & massacred by ISIS Not by the Syrian regime and you didn't even mention them or sympathize with them ? We don't say that the Syrian regime is good or fair , but we must say the truth about the whole involved participants.

Tony Blair is better knownas a friend and even adviser of totalitarian regimes. And as a salesman of the British weapons industry. selling weapons to despotic regimes like Saoudi arabia. this man knows not what the words shame and lies mean. He is one of those responsible for todays troubles in the Middle-East.

A terrorist group cannot 'seize' territory, it has to be supported by at least part of the community on the ground. And that is the weakness in your proposition Mr Blair. The problem is bigger than just IS and physical action does not eliminate thought. Just doing things physically because they are relatively easy has not been the answer so far.

I would have thought that was blindingly obvious after Iraqistan but apparently not. If the medicine doesnt work the answer is more of the same medicine with encouragement via emotive rallying phrases like 'Vctory over IS'? Really? Extremists must give thanks everyday for this sort of approach which simply consolidates their sense of entitlement.

The whole strategy of IS is to create the Mr Blairs of this world and in that they are succeeding. They want a modern Crusades. A Newtons Cradle of reaction to keep it all going

'... a process of transition: the Middle East toward rule-based and religiously tolerant societies...' The extent of denial in this comment is beyond belief, it is also effectively confirmation that MrBlairs concept is effectively the Westernisation of the ME. There is one problem with this, it is opposed by a critial mass of the native population. The fact that Mr Blairs 'solution' is basically - people who oppose me must be made to be more like me; by force if necessary aka 'boots on the ground' - is exactly the solution put forward by IS - appears to totally elude him

'On Mr Blairs work to determine / justify his POV - 'It shows clearly that uprooting this ideology will require digging deep'
I find this fundamentally self righteous as a statement which is where Iraq started. You do not 'uproot' an idealogy. The amount of sloppy thinking on show is disheartening

Whilst the opening section alludes to homegrown terrorism as an IS successful politcally provocative action nothing is proposed in this article to identify how this occurs or how it can be dealt with. As this is the immediate tool used by IS to create the Mr Blairs of this world I suggest it should recieve more focus than knee jerk war genuflexion

I would like to offer a controversial alternative.
Let us say radical Islam or other either religious or political extremism is not the primary problem. Instead they are like "weed", "overgrowth" which appears because the plantation is not healthy, not maintained properly.
And in fact the "global plantation" is in a terrible state. All the so called "values" we seemingly want to defend are no more. All traditional humane and moral foundations, principles were sacrificed at the altar of consumerism, "constant quantitative growth" illusion, the bind and ruthless competition to succeed at the expense of others.
In truth everybody only wants to defend themselves, do anything for their own individual or national sake. "Allies" are playing against each other as much as they fight "extremism". Moreover many times such extremism is usually invited to undermine, incite the "allies".
We will never defeat anything this way, instead we are on a path of self-destruction.
The moment we start caring for our common "global plantation" shifting from ruthless, exclusive and exploitative competition to mutually complementing cooperation extremism of any kind would gradually disappear as they would lose their area of growth, nutrition.

Zsolt, perhaps the solution you rightly point to has been around since 1948 in the form of the United Nations' Universal Declaration of Human Rights which pretty much summarizes the great conquest of the Human Spirit since time immemorial - Human Rights. If the Declaration were appropriately discussed in every classroom (and home?) around the world for one hour/year maybe on Dec 10th (The UN's Human Rights Day) the planet would be quite different in a generation or two. Thanks.

I hear of the alliance against ISIS -- including the Kurds, and including the Turks who "accidentally" seem to bomb Kurdish forces rather than those of ISIS. This sardonically reminds me of what was basically a "Murphy's Law" book by the name of Systemantics, years back. It showed a team of butterfly enthusiasts, with nets in hand, chasing their prize. These included one young lady, and a gentleman who was clearly trying to net her, and not the butterfly.

This is exactly what happens when you do not have an integral system with complete feedback--read mutual responsibility in the framework of the global human system.

If we keep seeking mere military, political or diplomatic solutions, if we are going to lie about egoism from the hallowed hall of Wall Street to the murderous tents of ISIS, we will continue our fall into entropy--multiplied by system complexity, into Murphy's Law.

Wise politicians would do well to realize that everything they love--perhaps a tad humanity, possibly more their countrymen or those of the same ethnic group, or their families--or most likely, their own skin--will eventually fall into the meat grinder if they don't work to form circle of mutual responsibility that will voluntarily grow with grow like bubbles joining together, evolving into a living and breathing Humanity whose parts actually love each other in their very differences as one's internal organs care for each other through their very distinction.

Did I say that Mr. Hermann’s suggestion was rational? Nay, not just rational—rather our only hope for a future, period.

Tony Blair calls for "a comprehensive strategy to defeat Islamist extremism, involving "force, diplomacy, and development" which would make the world more stable. The key element of his strategy is to destroy ISIS, "not just in Syria and Iraq, but also in Libya and everywhere else it operates."
If it would go his way, Blair wouldn't mind putting “boots on the ground,”which reminds us of his rushing into the Iraq war in 2003. Although ISIS "has seized territory in five countries and declared a new state ruled by fanatical ideologues," it is doubtful how sustainable its control is.
The group's territory in Iraq and Syria shrunk last year, lost to the Kurds in both countries. In Egypt, Sinai peninsula is said to be the group’s heartland, but the Bedouin tribes are defending their land and have started a new battle against the group. In Libya, Sirte is the only one territory outside Iraq and Syria that ISIS central leadership directly controls. The group had capitalised on instability following the toppling of Muammar Gaddafi in 2011 to make inroads. ISIS had tried to build up Sirte to match its Syrian headquarters in Raqqa, but is having a hard time meeting the basic needs of the population. In Nigeria, Boko Haram joined ranks with ISIS in March 2015 and changed its name to Islamic State's West African Province (Iswap). But a regional alliance has been formed to fight Boko Haram, taking back some territory from the group.
Sadly "ISIS cannot be negotiated out of existence." Yet we need to tread a fine between fighting terrorism and avoiding further alienating the Muslim community. It explains why the West reaches out to "a broad group of allies" in the region to share the burden. It is true that Europeans "have an overwhelming interest in erdadicating" ISIS, especially when the Libyan town of Sirte is merely 400 miles (640 km) from Sicily. In the short term terror theats hang over our heads like the Sword of Damocles. In the long term, EU leaders seek to help develop Europe's backyard, so that people in the region wouldn't have to flee their countries for safety or economic opportunites.
The Centre of Religion and Geopolitics is a thinktank run by the Tony Blair Faith Foundation. Blair insists on defeating ISIS, as a "first, albeit essential, step to a just outcome in Syria," and he is optimistic about the country going "to progress and fully respects its minorities" - without Assad.
Then he says: "Such a result will require leverage at the negotiating table, which is why helping our allies on the ground in Syria is crucial." Who are "our allies?" A week before Christmans, his thinktank said at least 65,000 jihadi fighters could fill vacuum if ISIS was defeated. More than half of the rebel fighters in Syria who oppose Assad are said to be sympathetic to Islamic State views.
While it is necessary to eradicate ISIS by military means, its defeat will not end the threat of Salafi-jihadism, unless this "pernicious ideology" sees an intellectual and theological defeat. Blair says education helps people to "understand why our values matter and why we will defend them." He is confident that "we will win" the fight, because the "overwhelming majority of people around the world wish to coexist" in peace.

Dear Tony, your article touches on many issues most of which have been debated at length on PS. Nevertheless, it is a good article, all in all. Religion or cultural issues are better left to the religious leaders. These leaders, of all faiths, must have recognised by now that the Status Quo is no longer viable and that they must take charge of the affairs of their communities. The political leaders must keep on reminding (and not scaremongering) their citizens to abide by the rules of the land and many of these rules must be brought in line with peoples’ expectations to take into account their grievances and the grievances of the marginalised minorities. One must give you credit for being the only one in British politics that had the courage to stand up to the UK establishment. The State of Israel is the problem and yet is the solution to the ME dilemma and therefore time has come to change strategies. Instead of a two state solution, one should work to strengthen and advocate a one state solution where both Palestinians and Israelis live side by side. In a way this is happening today (The State of Israel has the highest percentage of Muslim parliamentarians of any other secular country). To eradicate fundamentalism and extremism one should work hard at eradicating inequalities, racisms, prejudices, vindictivnesses, etc. You did a lot of work in this regard when you were PM but you faced strong resistance. The west, including the UK, should start working on educating their own population as to the benefits of multiculturalism and the co-existence of multiple cultural faiths. But for this to happen a sound plan to integrate the marginalised minorities must be developed and must be based on a true will to execute it.

You dont really think getting rid of IS gets rid of the conflict in the ME region do you Mr Blair. But I forget when you were advised that the social structure in Iraq was tribal and sectarian you ignored it believing it would all come good on the day with a good talking shop.

As for Afghanistan please let me know who has sought conflict there and won. The British had failure in the 19th Century and Russia in the 20th century. Alexander the Gt and Ghengis Khan both elected to parley and pass thru. If they decided it was not fruitful to seek conflict there I personally would take their advice

IS is simply a manifestation of the conflict in the region which is bigger than IS. To get rid of IS you have to solve the bigger problem or it will return like the mythical Hydra. The roots of the conflict are a millennium old. When I look around the area around Syria I do not see serious intent with peaceful co existance